tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 13, 2014 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
in fact if you look at the facts on global warming, average temperatures around the globe are increasing. data goingry good back really far on that. it is not just in the air. oceans,ook at the deep the temperatures deep in the ocean, away from cities that you would not expect, even those temperatures deep under the ocean surface are going up. get into global warming is another issue. in terms of cancer and in terms of research, what you have to focus on is that unfortunately, progress is not as fast as we would like. at just thisok study, just that. you have to look at a group of studies. randomized control trials. 30,000 foothole
view you have to look at. more information, the july edition of "scientific theican," living in collective world. inside that is the special report. thank you for your time. we need to go to the national press club, where underway as a national business group giving out their annual release on what large businesses are doing on health care coverage. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- perspective, this survey covers a wide spectrum of industries. industries are covered. no one industry dominates the survey. it is a very good representation of the market.
these are very large employers. 83% of them have over 10,000 employees. 19% have 100,000 employees or more. one of the significant things about large companies, they typically self fund their health care. they do not just pay premiums to an insurance carrier for coverage. they payfor claims and for medical costs and administrative fees out of their assets. for thoseully at risk costs. they leverage health plans to administer those plans and to use their networks. we look at one of the questions we asked employers -- what do they expect cost to be for 2014 and what do they project costs to be for 2014 and employees expect cost to be about 7%
about 6.5%014 and higher in 2015. if the plan design changes, karen will get more into the initiatives employers are the planfor 2015, design, through delivery system, improvements, changes, the net impact is roughly a 5% increase in 2015. onloyers are budgeting, average, 5%. to put that in perspective, what does that look like? if you are a large company that spends half $1 billion on health , a 5% increase is $25 million. that is $25 million additional headwind they have as they look into 2015 that they have to find ways to offset, to increase revenue, or looking at productivity. or, it affects earnings
per-share. it does not seem like a big but it is still a significant increase and has an impact on the bottom line. the impact on employees, a few cost-sharing. the percentage of the premium employees pay is consistent over the last several years and will remain consistent in 2015. most employers are paying about 80% of the premium for employees. if you think about annual enrollment and impact for employees, they can expect to -- 5%out a 5% impact increase on their premiums. for spousal coverage, employees pay about 24%. that has been creeping up over
the last number of years. karen will get into the examples as why. employers look at their medical plans. if a spouse has coverage through their own employer, employers call -- are beginning to charge more if they elect to stay on the employer's plan rather than go on a spouse's plan. that is why you see a higher percentage of the premium being paid for spousal coverage in the survey data. at the top cost of drivers for health care, they are the usual suspects. high-cost claims, special conditions, categoried conditions. the interesting thing, when i looked at the data, we asked what the top three cost drivers for employers were. 50% identified as the
second or third highest cost driver as specialty pharmacy. aat is being considered second or third primary driver of cost for overall cost. employers are focused on specialty pharmacy and an impact of that is as we look at 2015. another question we asked his around the excise tax or the cadillac tax. when employers are doing to or eveninimize the tax delay that impact, when you look at the survey results, you can see employers are looking to employees in the driver seat. they are arming them with health care shopping tools, moving them to consumer directed health plans and they are building
incentives for or have continued incentives for health care management. they are working with employees to engage them in how to best manage their health care costs. excise tax, when it hits in 2018, it will affect employers and employees. engage andnt we can help put them in the driver seat , this can be a more effective way of delaying that impact. interest overf the last couple of years is in private exchanges. we continue to see movement on the retirees being steered into private exchanges.
movement oneeing active employees being moved into private exchanges. you can see from 2016 and out, a large percentage of employers are interested in private exchanges, but they are in a wait-and-see mode. the confidence employers have in private exchange, we asked if they had confidence in a private exchange possibility to do a number of things better than what an employer does today. where private exchanges scored high were on items like , managingmore choice a contribution environment, or even handling or managing regulatory compliance. where they did not score, it had to do with their ability to
engage employees and health care shopping or health care decisions. their ability to control health-care care costs. until we see more confidence move up the line on those items, employers will stand on a sidelines and wait to see this develop. they are interested in private exchanges, they are watching them, but they want to see how they mature over time. with that, i will turn it over to karen, who will talk more about initiatives employers are implementing for 2015. >> as brian mentioned, employers
are concerned about how to control costs. we asked what they thought were the most effective steps they can take to control health care costs. we saw a focus on implementing consumer directed health plans, additional tactics help control costs. in addition, related to the issue of consumer directed health plan, we wanted to understand the prevalence of the health lands. we saw increase in the prevalence of these plans. those surveyed had at least one cd hp as one of their plan offerings. our year, we had 22% of
sample had a replacement model. cdhp was the only option. about a third are in a full replacement model as a way to engage employees to be consumers of health care. in addition, employers have looked at their relationship with providing coverage for spouses. focus oninue to ensuring they provide coverage dependents and spouses who have no other options. employers have implemented coveragel cost to get through their own employer for 2015. they're continuing to provide coverage to spouses who don't have coverage as well as dependent children. they're looking to make sure they apply appropriate coverage
to those who have no other option available to them. there is a new focus around network -- around narrow networks. it is the idea of steering employees to quality providers. we asked how many of our employers have a narrow network in place. we found three quarters of them do not. 13% offer at least one plan that ts employees to use these programs. very few offer plans with narrow networks. in addition, employers seek ways to move employees to quality providers, to providers that provide quality care and coordinated care.
we asked employers -- are you going to be -- do you offer and employers -- employees to use knowers. we found about 15% of the respondents do have centers of excellence for transplant as well as other conditions. the ones that you hear most spineour orthopedic, surgery, knee surgery or heart conditions. about 30% are actually incentivize, meaning they may pay for your travels. in addition, about a quarter have networks with ace is. very few incentivize them. howre trying to learn effective the care is going to be. a lot the things we saw of interest in and we have seen
employers implement as tele-health. the opportunity to call a dr. for minor health conditions that you may not be able to get into see her primary care doctor, you do not have time or they occur they areurs traditional physician is not available. it provides access to employees and steers them away from emergency room use. another area we have seen interest in is whether employers are going to be direct contracting with providers. are they going to contract directly with centers of providece, providers to care directly to their employees. there has been some interest in it, but we have not seen large growth. that has more to do with it is a complicated task. employers are used to having their health lands lay -- play
that role -- their health plans play that role. are looking to incentivize employees to use the ones in the network. when it comes to employees, we that employers are offering a large range of tools and to bems to help employees healthy, to get good health care. we saw 85% of our respondents having nurse codes for condition management. heart attack or cardiovascular disease, the nurses will help you change your lifestyle. seen 71% have price transparency tools. those are tools provided through a health plan or a separate entity that allows an employee
to log in and say i need to get an mri and it shows them where they can get that and what their responsibility would be. the idea behind those is to drive employees to a lower-cost option that provides the same quality care. brian mentioned one of the main cost of drivers that popped up in the survey was on specialty pharmacy. we looked to understand what employers are doing around specialty pharmacy. there has been a huge interest in it this year. the year of arrival -- the arrival of the hepatitis c drug has brought interest to the topic. employers are using a multitude of ways to ensure that these drugs, which are often for complex and life-threatening diseases, are getting to the right employees.
they may use prior authorization, step therapy, used onhey have non-specialty pharmaceuticals. they are looking at newer ways. this is for people who -- for people who have hepatitis c, a can be hard to manage the disease. respondents have high touch case management. this is a qualified physician who knows the disease the employees have. they walk them through what they need to do to be compliant and ensure they stay compliant. these medications are expensive and they do not work if you do not take them. channeling all of these specialty pharmacies through either a preferred retail network or through the specialty pharmacy group. that is an effort to make sure it is the appropriate drug for the right patient and that the patient is getting all of the support they need when they have these -- have this disease and
need to take these medications. askedst question that we what ouras around employers going to be focusing on in 2015? there are so many areas they can focus on. question, what three behaviors are they going to focus on? what we found was dashed through the theme of the findings this year, consumer engagement in health care and decision-making with the top. -- was at the top. this lifestyle risk that we know are a major concern and how they impact our health care and our health long-term. with that, i will turn it back over to brian to wrap this up. that, whataid all of
can employees expect during annual enrollment? there is a movement to full replacement high deductible plans. into fullen a jump replacement, high deductible plans. that is a different animal from one an employee may be used to. that engaging in and understanding what is in your enrollment packets are you are not surprised come january. out a lot of information so you understand how these plans work. employers are implementing incentives to engage employees
in lifestyle or health care management. there are ways to maximize benefits buying gauging in those incentives. there are any number of great decision support tools and resources that many companies offer that are underutilized because they are out of sight and out of mind. know what the programs are. they are either offered through your employer or offered through your health plan. if you know what they are, they can be valuable to your employee when they are faced with a medical issue. lots of information for employees to pay attention to, in addition to the fact that costs will be going up around 5% or so. pay attention to those things. looking at spousal coverage, as spousal coverage increases, if your spouse is covered under
your plan and if they have coverage through their employer, take a look to see if that makes more sense for them. all of this information at the time of employment can help an employee maximize their benefits as they go into 2015, reticular early when it comes into the plans as to what to expect in january, when you start seeing much different than you have ever seen in the past. with that, we will open it up for questions. >> can you talk more about how differentonship are -- i have hepatitis c, how are they being more aggressive with me to make sure that i stay on my medication. is it feel different than if i am going to my primary care
physician? >> a thing about specialty pharmacy is to make sure we get the right type of care. dispensed in ae hospital setting and in some cases the home. the intent is to provide the court nation, regardless of the setting, with your physician, and to try to get the most cost effective setting. the compliance is really critical. the other challenge is dosing. is the dose right? what employers do is limit the initial dose to 30 days or so so there is not excess waste if the dose has to be adjusted. staying close to the patient and understanding what other elements of care they need to access and how that is coordinated is a big part of what is trying to be done on the specialty pharmacy side. 5% projected cost increase
for 2015 is significantly lower than what many of the public insurers are reporting are seeking. how do you explain the cost the coste exploit -- difference employers expect? >> employers have a stable environment. employees do not have a lot of turnover. .hey work with you be public exchanges are relatively new. i still think they're going through a shakeout period. you will still see volatility and rates because of that. it is hard to say what those rate increases reflect. do they reflect the true underlying cost or the jockeying in the market to understand the risk that health plans are getting and how do they price that risk?
of years ofuple experience to get under our belt before we can understand the pricing in the public exchanges and how you would compare that to the employers. i have a question about spousal coverage. you mentioned there might be a surcharge for spouses where they can get coverage on their own. of sayingresult dependent coverage does not includes thousands for a large and poor -- include spouses for large employers? a spouse has coverage through their employer, it is really an incentive to get coverage through your employer and not through the company --
through your spouse's plan. that is the impetus behind it. it is not tied to anything else. as employers look at the cadillac tax and what the impact will be down the road, this is one of the tactics they are implementing to manage cost. other questions? karen mentioned a ceo's -- aco's. stuffis a lot of aco going on across the country. there is more talk about setting these up as all payer mechanisms, getting the commercial insurers involved. it is happening in many states. the missing piece are the self-funded large employers.
many people are trying to figure out how to make that happen and get your members in these groups with the pay, the reimbursement incentives lined up the same way. how quickly do you see that happening with your members? >> the first thing about aco's is they are emerging quickly and rapidly. the big question for employers is -- how do i decide what is a good aco and what isn't? if you have health plans coming 80 in saying we will have 2014,nd another 30 in from an employer's perspective, i do not know what that means. you cannot affect change that fast for it to be that much better than what you have. i think what employers are looking for is what constitutes a good aco?
what elements tell me i know it when i see it? what type of outcomes can i expect? --t we need to do intuitively, we get the model. we need to understand how effective it is. reimbursement is changing in those models. away fromoving fee-for-service and moving into bundled payments and other mechanisms of reimbursing providers. there is a lot of change management that has to go on to accept that type of change and the type of resources being put in place to drive that. we like the idea of aco's and the direction it is heading. even high-performing networks structure inn terms of what is going on. what is the value? if we are going to go to our employees and incentivize them to go into aco's, we need a
business case. and have aund business case into why this is better for an employee than what they currently have today. -- how do weo find measure that value? that is going to be a critical focus in the business group. that is what our members are looking for. can you talk about the employer mandate deadline and how businesses are reacting or what you were able to get linked to the deadline in january? i am not as familiar with this one. the employer business mandate, i am sorry. karen, do you know that one? >> in terms of the 30 hour requirement? employers would like to see
that go to 40 hours. jockeyingme companies with part-time workers to limit their hours below 30 hours. other companies look to bring on more part-time workers to balance that out. you have other companies providing coverage, regardless. it is going to be very different, depending on the company, the culture, the value proposition, the industry and how they will approach that. all of them would like to see a push from 30 hours to 40 hours as a definition of coverage eligibility. if there is anything we hope we can get through congress, that is one of the short-term goals. are speaking about how
this year is a big year to focus on the and roman packet. packet.e enrollment what is the biggest change i need to recognize? >> is my health plan changing? a rapid movement, that is the first question. is my plan different next year? if it is, what do i need to do to understand it and engage in that? second, looking at spousal coverage and trying to maximize your benefits in terms of -- is my spouse better off on her plan or my plan if she has a plan. doing the math and figuring it out. open enrollment is typically a type of -- a time of year where employers have incentives around engaging in health assessments and biometrics. if you are in a high deductible your typically see -- feed
spending account with money if you do certain things. watch those incentives. there is typically a window to participate in those types of events. other questions? >> sean bloomberg. i have a question regarding the cadillac tax. how many of the employers, regardless of all they are doing , to keep the cost down, expect they will keep the cadillac tax? >> i think they will all hit it eventually. some well faster than others. even as it goes forward in the future, it is indexed to general inflation not health care inflation.
unless we can get health care under control, we will all hit it at some point. there are companies worried about hitting it immediately in 2018. they are aggressively trying to and howh their benefits they can manage to get under that or minimize the impact so there is not the 30% tax as significant as it could be. other questions? thank you all for coming. we appreciate the time. if you have other questions, please follow-up at the end. thank you.
>> as the briefing comes to a ande, " washington post" other outlets reporting that health and human services industry sending out letters notifying coverage could be cut off unless they provide proof of citizenship or immigration status, making them eligible for insurance on the marketplace. in an announcement yesterday comes as the administration tries to resolve 2 million cases
of discrepancies on insurance applications. more live coverage coming up this afternoon. the center for strategic studies will be hosting a conversation between south korea, japan, and the united states. we plan to have live coverage of that on c-span. outside of washington, president obama continues his family vacation to martha's vineyard. the president and hillary clinton joining the conversation tonight. riding the big question is whether they can employ their expert political skills to diminish any awkward moments. clinton's team says the two will hug it out as evening. for more on the comments and the clinton-obama relationship we spoke with a reporter this morning. >> sean sullivan, politics reporter. you had a piece yesterday that hillary clinton calls president
obama about this. what did she have to say? >> had to say,at she according to her spokesperson, i was not trying to attack foreign policy, trying to attack you personally. when this first came out it was pretty surprising and blew up really quickly and got a lot of media attention. obviously anything hillary clinton says, especially when she puts daylight between herself and present obama will get a lot of attention. i think clinton entertained were caught off balance about how much attention this got. i think she felt the need to smooth it over. her message was i was not trying to take a day at the policy or you. the reality is she very clearly delay in the aided -- to eliminate -- delineated the ideas about what she believes.
it will be interesting to see in the months forward. everyone expects hillary clinton to run for president. it she does, every time she puts the stents between herself and the president, it will flare up. >> what was the reaction from the white house? what the president said in a phone call? >> we don't. the biggest thing we saw yesterday was from david axelrod, former top obama aide a comment that shows he clearly was not happy with what hillary clinton set. waysension and a lot of has ended that they would both admit there is still a lot of tension at the fact level. that they sought a bitter campaign against each
other. i think there is still a lot of quiet animosity between staff members of both sides. when these things happen, not surprising to see former aides they conflict-- with all axelrod said yesterday. >> let show the viewers. just to clarify, he said, don't do stupid stuff, stuff like the firstiraq and place, which was a tragically bad decision. clinton andrs. president obama are both in martha's vineyard vacationing and supposedly going to hug it out eight or? >> that is what the spokesperson said in the statement yesterday. should be an interesting day on martha's vineyard. the president on vacation and trying to monitor the situation overseas and the situation in iraq.
seeill be interesting to what comes of this. whether there is a photo op for something else to show things have been smoothed over. i think clinton and obama have become genuine friends but is probablyhe staff not. interesting to see what happens on martha's vineyard today. purex what about the politics of this if she does run and she faces challengers in the democratic primary, what could be the fallout of this? here is the new republic with the headline >> and she does run in this, she gets a challenger to the left. come as think it should a surprise to anybody, given what we saw in 2008 that hillary
clinton is more hawkish than president obama on foreign policy. i think that is something pretty well-established. the field to herself, this is not something that will come up in the primary but if she gets a democratic challenger, even if that person is a minor challenger, this is an obvious way for the person to attack her. looking ahead you have someone , you could see the potential for real clash of foreign policy between some of mike rand paul and hillary clinton. a lot has changed in the past few years in the public right now is really skeptical about intervening abroad after years and years of for. not a public ready to send u.s. troops anywhere right now. to do is bee mindful and understand it is not
a public that wants to go to war but a public that is very skeptical about intervening. be interesting to see how and if she calibrates the foreign policy. >> thank you for your time. >> we expect to hear more about tonight's dinner and the latest developments in the rack -- nin iraq with the white house briefing with eric schultz. he will live coverage. we will hear from government health experts tracked with -- tasked with tracking dangerous diseases. talking about tracking an outbreak of talks into americans that was traced to test prairie dogs. >> the researchers like neil and others to investigate this very thing, you merging diseases in people are often traced back to animals.
one of these situations occurred in 2003. the first hint we have that something had gone terribly wrong is a three-year-old girl who lived in was confident and odd, verythese very disturbing skin lesions. i am too young to have been vaccinated from smallpox. i was the first generation that did not get a smallpox vaccine but many researchers dedicated their early careers to eradicating this disease from the world and took one look at the picture and said that a smallpox. we were very worried, especially when a second case was reported a few days later from another part of wisconsin. these two patients did not know each other. one is a three-year-old girl and one is a businessman. they had one piece of history in common, they had been both -- both been bitten by sick pet prairie dogs. >> you can watch all of the look by cdc on detectives
c-span. coming up in primetime on c-span2, more on "book tv." tv."n3, " american history all tonight starting at 8:00 eastern on the c-span networks. up next, a discussion on the preferred -- deferred action for childhood arrivals program. it provides a two-year protection from deportation, allowing for young undocumented immigrants to live and work legally in the united states. this is hosted by hugh to read -- charitable trust. -- pew charitable trust. >> good morning, everyone. my name is adam hunter.
if you need the restrooms, they are outside of the door. you will find them on either side of the reception desk. we are encouraging you to live tweet the event. the #is here on the screen. we are recording and live streaming so when it does come time for the discussion later in the program, please be sure to use the microphones up both sides of the room. it is my pleasure to introduce a veteran executive who runs the .overnment here are some words of welcome. [applause] >> good afternoon afternoon, and welcome to the pew charitable trust. i am very pleased to welcome you to the panel discussion we will have today we are a nonprofit
nonpartisan organization established in 1948 by the four children of the sun oil founder company joseph pew and his wife mary anderson pew. we are guided by the values and vision of those founders and their direction to us to tell the truth and trust the people and that shapes our commitment to rigorous and objective research and analysis that can inform public policy and policy change. today we operate several research and advocacy projects focused on public opinion, environment, health, family economic stability in state policy. the mission to inform the public and improve public policy has led us to work on a broad range of critically important issues ranging from state fiscal health and economic growth, sentencing reform, controlled -- children's mental health food, drug and medical device and innovation. a long history with working on states on economic policy issues and recently have
begun to look more deeply at the federal state fiscal and federal economic relationship. to that end, our immigration in the states project began about a year ago and focuses on the intersection of federal, state and local immigration law and policy. at the two-year anniversary of the deferred action for childhood arrivals program, we had an important opportunity to take stock of the program to impact states and localities across the country. today's discussion is not only timely but serves to highlight the important role that state and local actors play and are often overlooked when programs are designed are -- or implement it. i would like to thank all of our panelists for joining us. and thank all of you for joining us as well. with that, i will turn the program over to the project direct or in the matter of -- moderator, adam hunter. thank you. [applause] great.
we do have a stellar planner -- panel this afternoon so we won't want to get to it but i want to make some brief introductory remarks. mentioned, our project focuses on the intersection of state and local immigration laws and policies. the provide nonpartisan analyses information for government. i was the acting chief of staff citizenship-- u.s. and immigration services within the department of homeland security. i worked extensively during that time on the program and am very pleased to see callings here with us today. also want to acknowledge there has been a lot of immigration news as of late, particularly around two big issues. one clearly the ongoing crisis with the children coming to the southwest border. many without their families. this was not the focus today.
these individuals are not able to qualify. the second pertains to congress has not signed an immigration bill with the reforms he would like. takeated he would executive action with existing laws to fix as much of the immigration system as we can. now the administration's approach in creating the deferred action for childhood arrivals process is thought by many people to be a model program for president may be considering for possible changes. we do not take any position on current or proposed immigration related legislation or policy proposals. to nexus for our project is examine federal programs such as doca and look at why policy levels should consider the roles when contemplating other federal changes.
let me first provide background and who is eligible. two years ago this week on august 15, 2012 u.s. citizenship and immigration services began accepting requests. individualsated for who at the federal government's discussion -- discretion for deemed low priority for removal of the united states and met several criteria. they had to be under 31 when the program began, had to have come to the united states before their 16th birthday. they needed to be here. they need to be in school,, completed school or served in the armed services and importantly, no serious criminal history. as an active discretion, recipients are not gaining any legal status and do not have a pathway to citizenship but for
the nearly 600 individuals in the program, what they do get is a two-year renewable reprieve from deportation and the ability to work lawfully in the united states. mightea of estimating who be eligible is a challenging one for many reasons there is not the data available. i would note migration policy institute published a report where they estimated 1.2 million people were to be eligible at the outset of the program and 55% ofnd -- recognized those have since made the request with uscis. to focus onbe able the pros and cons of the policy choice or to recommend administrative approaches, but what we can learn from the program as it exists about the unique role states and you -- a catalytic have played in the traditional arena.
we will begin by highlighting heated a role, looking at specific state examples and then assess the impact nationally and across key areas and states, and finally, turn to how the public views docket in light of other immigration reforms on the public and generally how the public views it in america. introduce aly panelists as they come up or the discussion. to introduce my colleague, michelle who manages the research agenda. she has come to pew from the immigration policy center where she is a renowned author of many studies and reports on immigration policy and a frequent commentator in english and spanish media. we look forward to your observations. [applause] >> thank you.
and thank you to all of you for being here this afternoon. we generallytated, think of immigration as a federal issue. comes toy when it something like a legalization program or deferred action, because it is only the federal government that can protect someone from deportation or change a deportation status. however, they often have responsibility when it comes to implementing these types of programs. to first point out this is not an issue all states need to think about, because today there are many more unauthorized immigrants living in nontraditional living space. so here on the map you see california, illinois, new york, yourda -- these are traditional immigrant receiving states. they have the largest number of on authorized immigrants in 1990
and 2010. the states in green, including nevada and arizona -- these are the states that have the largest growth in unauthorized population between 2090 -- the between 2009 and 2010. there are more unauthorized immigrants living in states that do not have a lot of experience. similarly, we are seeing the largest number of those applying are from the traditional immigrant receiving states but other states like georgia, north carolina and virginia are seeing large numbers of people applying. you will hear more about those numbers in a bit. our paper 2 released called roles and response abilities of states and localities. in the paper we looked at two oh grams. we looked at immigration and in 1980 six.l act
two point 7 million people legalized under the program at the time, and we looked at doca. programs wet the identified for potential roles and responsibilities for states and localities if there were to be a new legalization program or some kind of expanded deferred action program. these are outreach and public education, documentation, education and protecting immigrants from fraud. so let's look at these one by one. education.each and states and localities can and do play an important role in educating communities about program, program requirements, how to apply and assisting applicants with the application process. theound in the new york state and local officials actively publicize the legalization program. the mayor's office created task
forces to identify areas to legalization him and there was legalization information hotline that was funded jointly by the city, state and federal government. now we are seeing the same thing . that some states are doing town conducting community meetings, organizing application workshops, creating informational materials in multiple languages and otherwise trying to educate the community about this application process and help them. we will hear more about these efforts in illinois in a bit. the sector role is documentation. this means states and localities are often the force of the occupants need to prove they have met the eligibility requirements. this requires proof of high school degree, living in the united states for a number of years.
again, school state and locally operated utilities and other government agencies provided documents like school records, tax records and utility bills that help applicants prove they had been living in the united states for the required amount of time. publicare also seeing schools are very important because they are involved in providing transcripts to students so they can prove they have met the education requirements or by completing high school or getting their ged. education. public schools and community colleges may already be providing the education that applicants need to meet the program's educational requirements. if the program requires additional education, states and localities may be providing english language classes or other types of education as well. so applicants had to meet english language in u.s. history
and civic requirements and state localities were a big part of providing lasses applicants need. now you have to have a high school diploma or ged or must be currently in school. job-related english courses or other adult education courses can also be applicable and these are things that are often coordinated i states and the colonies. -- by states and localities. the city council created additional education slots and so they can build a educational requirement. finally, protection from fraud. protection from fraudulent or this means states and localities can play a role in protecting immigrants from people who try to target them
and charge them exorbitant fees for service that they may or may not be able to provide. we know these types of predatory when therere common is a new legalization program or a rumor that such might be passed. currently at least 29 states have laws that are specifically regulating the unauthorized practice of immigration laws. year california passed a new law that makes it a violation for attorneys to charge immigrants in advance for any services related to a legalization program before the legalization program is passed by congress. just last week new york enacted a law that creates new crimes and penalties for immigration assistance fraud. there are a couple of other areas where states and localities could play a role in implementation and includes coordinating the efforts taking base across multiple government agencies and nonprofit organizations that we know are
doing a large amount of work with implementation as well. states and localities are monitoring implementation and assessing needs and maybe assessing the future needs of the newly legalized population. states recognize all have not been actively promoting andmplementing doca promoting their own resources. there is a great variation regarding the amount of resources they are allocating to create resource materials and reach out to the communities. implementation, states and localities make other decisions regarding the broader .mplementation so what type of benefits and services will they be eligible for down the line? for example, wall most states are issuing drivers license, at least to states announced they have
chosen not to issue drivers licenses to the recipients. it is important to recognize the roles and responsibilities of arees and localities somewhat determined by the federal government. even at the federal government does not include implicit rules, the details of the program really do influence the level of involvement in the federal government really needs to be aware of this and take states and localities into account as they move forward. these include the eligibility requirements. applicants will have to prove they lived in the united states, that they received a certain level of education or that they have paid taxes and will meet documents in order to prove they met the requirements and states may be the source of
documentation the application may need. the timing is also important. the length of time it takes to get the applications together are the same time states and localities will have two or pair for their role and get materials in order. oca was implemented very quickly. year toka they had one meet the requirements. so there is a real possibility states and localities could be completely overwhelmed if there is a large number of people looking for the documents or services in a short amount of time, so this federal government needs to give adequate time to prepare. i know lee, funding. of course we recognize funding is an issue. there is a precedent for congress to include funding for states and localities for implementation.
1986 the impact assistance grant that partially reimbursed states and localities for english language classes and other services they provided. the federal government needs to into accountings if and when they are designing some kind of new program. the immigration team currently working on another project. where you are looking at state implementation of new drivers license laws. the king at the states that now allow them to issue drivers licenses to people who cannot prove they are lawfully present in the united states. as part of the drivers license process, what we're finding is already verifying identity documents, including foreign issue documents. -- other state agencies are meeting to discuss the security features of foreign
issue documents. states are verifying state residency. requiring they paid taxes for a time in the state. they have set up a system to verify tax payments. the state and dmv working out to immigrant communities in multiple languages, me working with community-based organizations, providing materials in multiple languages and handling large numbers of applicants and long lines. what we're seeing is we think a lot can be learned from the state experiences for issuing drivers license that may be applicable to future immigration programs. so finally, and i know i am out , allme, in conclusion states and localities need to be thinking about this and preparing for how they might respond or if there is a new legalization program or if there
is an expanded program. some states and localities there are rre playing a role. so, they are reaching out to applicants. providing them with information on how to apply in providing documentation that they need. readyay they are our preparing themselves for the roles and responsibilities in the case of the future deferred action program. we know policymakers have choices. when the government makes choices, they affect states and localities. we hope today's presentations are a first step towards helping policymakers from all levels of government making -- make informed decisions. thanks. [applause] >> thank you very much for the astute overview of the different roles states and localities can choose to play.
theuld like to turn now to deputy chief of staff to the illinois governor. her role is to charge us -- across state agencies to advance the latino and immigration affairs agenda. it is important to note it is an has ate example that long-standing immigration policy agenda. with that, we look forward to hearing about her experiences. thank you. >> thank you. i am really happy to be here. pew generalhank trust. hard to believe it has been two years and a nice point and time to look on far we have come. in illinois we are very much a pro-government right state. the governor prides himself in being the most welcoming state.
it is really true. if we have legislative and government action to back that up. is give you a do quick overview what illinois did in response. once the program was launched, one of the first things he did is we looked across state agencies to see what barriers inre may be or individuals obtaining employment. as part of the process we realized there were no barriers. no requirements to be a citizen or permanent residents to get a license. nursing, cosmetology. it was nice to know there were no concrete barriers, but on the other hand, we did a lot of public education in letting people know they should be applying. individuals they have all the other options as
well. the governor created the illinois dream fund commission. this predated doca a little bit. it is a commission that is created by the governors so the board members are appointed by the governor. they are charged with creating a nonprofit that raises private dollars to fund scholarships for individuals. so we're in our second, going into the third year. to give you an idea of how successful the program has been during the first year they gave out $100,000 in scholarships to dirty five students, but the demand was intense. over 1200 applications. so almost double. incredible demand on that end. -- moving tolated a related area, we did something
really unique in illinois. being really creative, we arranged for the illinois finance authority, a state agency that provides financing to municipalities to other nongovernmental bodies. last week i was in a press conference room of the first day of the medical starting in the first class. it is really a phenomenal program. the way it works is the students who meet the requirements are selected with the other students so the standards remain the same and the students who are eligible apply with everybody else. in this earth class there happens to be seven. those students will receive ongoing -- loans through the
illinois finance authority and at the end of the education they will work for three or four years. that is a charitable purpose in terms of providing very much needed medical services in underserved communities. we have had a wonderful response. in chicago the governor is looking at expanding that. we will look to have all of the medical and dental schools participate. we're currently looking at it standing the program, and i hope other states will follow. as was mentioned earlier, the temporary drivers license. was really the largest state. there were a few that are ready had temporary drivers license for unauthorized individuals but illinois was the largest one to do that. we signed that last year. implementation began in january so we are eight months into it.
an amazing program whereby individuals cannot -- you cannot provide proof they are here a drivers issued license. it is temporary and renewed every three years. so the program is run out of office and we have been working with them and the implementation and has been going very well. we have had our glitches but a wonderful program. up to this point there has been 90,000 licenses issued, which is very crested. we have also looked at the regulations that implement because the regulations are critically in porton in making sure the programs successful. a couple of other ones i want to mention that are in the works that relate to doca individuals as well as other immigrants, the
affordable care act has launched , and undocumented individuals are not eligible to participate. we are currently exploring the possibility of creating a separate exchange for anyone not eligible to participate in the traditional exchange. i know california has taken steps as well but this is something very important to the governor and will have a positive impact in a lot of communities. the other item i wanted to mention is the welcoming centers. illinois has several welcoming centers taste in mainly immigrant communities whereby several state agencies have staff members and provide services. walksample, if the family and there is a comprehensive asessment done so there is program for food stamp, evaluated for childcare or job training. it is a way where we get all of
our agencies, expanding this so we can provide many services out in the community. the welcoming center is a really good model to use. in general there is something the president -- if he takes action, would be a great model to expand to assist individuals -- benefitrun a fit from having some sort of status here. oft gives you the idea illinois. we're really busy doing what we can until the federal government takes action, and i think that is important to understand that in illinois and other states we try to approach it as best we approachhe piecemeal of prioritizing and filling in the cap's where we have the authority to do that. hopefully we will have a point in time when we will not have to do that anymore and we will have a lot of individuals who can
live here and live the american dream. thank you. [applause] >> now that we have heard a little bit about state and local roles responsibility during implementation and right after implementation and how they responded him a we're going to back out and look at the program. i am very pleased to invite audrey singer, a senior fellow within the metropolitan policy program and has written extensively on immigration and demographic trend issues and right now in the midst of a very in-depth study looking at the impact across key metropolitan areas. [applause] thank you so much. pewly a big thank you to for putting this together. a great opportunity on the two-year anniversary to talk
about one of my favorite topics. mostam going to talk -- as of you know the program was announced a little bit more than two years ago in june of 2012 two monthslemented later. the program identified a group that was considered very low priority for removal to the country, those who had come to the united states as children and educated in u.s. schools. i will talk about about what we know so far about doca applications with special preliminary findings from the brookings project. so in this project we are , and therly interested particular the role of nonprofits and other and applicantsotential and the administrative response by u.s. gis. after all, the two months
between the announcement and beginning of application assets was a very short amount of time for the actors to gear up. no federal funding allocated for the services of community-based organizations, legal service providers and others that make up the infrastructure that serve immigrants. know the underlying composition of the eligible population and the agencies that assist them very by place. in learningsted about experiences across localities in the united states in order to understand the variation and success in the program. what we're learning from this study and others currently underway should be helpful as the obama administration considers an expansion of the program. quantitative a components, where we are analyzing data on applicants,
and we are conducting interviews with nonprofit advocacy groups, legal service providers, dreamer municipal leaders in key metropolitan areas across the country. so who are the doca population? we can break the big group into several subcategories of potential participants. a ready are those immediately eligible. ory fit the arrival criteria are currently enrolled or have graduated from a u.s. high school. this group has the easiest time accounting for their presence and the united states. they tend to be younger and have trialer -- e.g. earlier to document. they arrived prior to 2000 seven but were not yet 15 at the start of the program. nearly halfted that a million young people could potentially aid into eligibility in the near future, provided
they stay in school. in many places there is considered -- considerable support that promote the program and assist applicants. a third group must enroll in school. they are estimated to be more than 400,000 compass group is the hardest to reach and the hardest to convince. they tend to be older and isolated from support organizations. they would have to enroll in an educational program like ged to be eligible. we have learned each requires different methods of outreach and different methods of assistance. we have heard from service providers that there is a fourth, much smaller group. these are typically used being screened by legal service providers that are found to be eligible for other legal status, most commonly you visa is for
victims of certain crimes and juvenile which helps foreign children in the united states who have been abused, abandoned or neglected. quick -- quick run through the numbers before adam gets the hook. start here with the total program applications by quarter. applications came in very large numbers and the early part of the program. than expected applied in the first three months. they remained high and then dropped. quarterly data it appears as though it he eight percent have been approved. three percent to nine and the remainder still pending. deferred action only granted for two years, so those that applied early and have their applications accepted early on must now reapply for another two-year grant.
applications have come in for more than 200 countries. 77% of all applications and nearly half a million have come mexican through central american countries and have the next largest numbers of applicants. el salvador with four percent in guatemala and honduras each with 2.5%. the next largest number of applicants from south korea. 7500 or one percent of the total. peru, result, effort or. countries inore the share by region of the world. this map shows the number of applications by state reflects many of the patterns of the growth of the unauthorized population on the map that michelle showed earlier. there is no surprise california and texas have the largest number of allocate --
applicants. these are the states with the greatest number of on authorized residents. many of the newer destination states, those with the greatest change in unauthorized population, georgia and north for carolina and the southeast have had relatively large numbers of applications. fortunately for the purposes of .he project these account for 82% of request nationwide from the start of the program through the start of 2014. between one and 9000 applications. 11 are home to 11,000 requesters. los angeles the largest number of applicants. across thely 78,000
country. requesters and the new york mets to politan area submitted 44,000. and the rest of them shown in orange all have between 12 and 31,000 applicants together. these all make a path of applications nationwide. the approval is another thing we are interest bids for how they vary by place. where are the highest and the lowest tier? the blue has the highest approval rate. all of them are well above the u.s. metro average of 89%. chicago and riverside, california are those with large numbers of applications and have some of the highest approval rates. 98% each.
in terms of those with lower than average approval rates. some stand out. they are lower than average approval rates. and while the number of applications is not large in miami and boston, they are withle in the gateways lower numbers and approval rates. elsewhere lower than average newarables appear in destinations such as las vegas, reno, nashville, indianapolis and several in florida. what accounts for the differences? lots of things. doing outat we are there trying to figure things out. we do not have enough information from these particular data to know among the applicants have not been approved how many have been denied and how many are still pending, but we can assume
differences in application levels and approval rates request -- reflect the size and approval rates of undocumented including earth -- birthplace and infrastructure. no doubt the infrastructure in ,lace to assist matters as well and well-informed and well intentioned service providers must -- might be the most effective. so what are we finding in the field? much politanto six area so far. they are listed here. and we have talked to an interview -- and interviewed scores of legal service providers. from these interactions we hear what is happening on the frontlines. how service providers view the program as it has unfolded.
each has their own organizations that provide services in their own minutes of polities that support or drive away immigrants. each has their own story. clear how the timing of applications and adjudications very across places. the first wave of applicants had a large share of those we .onsider doca ready type to schools. older applicants had more time prove the further you are from school, the more likely you are to have other types of evidence, including things like library cards, paypal histories, mobile phone
contracts, bank statements, enrollment and post-high school courses. a range of things people have used. typical for young people undocumented in this country. finding the evidence and documenting their time in the u.s. gets much harder to further away you get. they can see in the data that younger applicants process faster and approves more readily and older applicants applied later and have larger numbers of pending applications. these have findings are tied to the date of the case is adjudicated, not application but also for thinking through what an extension of.doc would look adult took like for have to document the presence in the united states. there are a lot of factors that come into play in making it a successful program for individual laces.
sorry about the slide being linked for a while. here we know the immigration of history matters come a gateways haveed supports in place. faces was shorter histories and not as well developed infrastructure might have a harder time without reaching assistance. not necessarily called the case -- not necessarily the case. another factor that varies by place is the composition of the ovulation in particular. mexican applicants drive the numbers but they are younger and have higher rates of approval than the average. some of the differences across the area has to do with more diverse populations that tend to be older and that may have something to do with lower application rates and lower
approval rates in places like boston and miami. issues that can induce people to apply is including state and local policy particularly around drivers license and in-state tuition. finally, i want to say something about barriers to applying. isther part of our inquiry around why people are not applying, what is holding them back. we have identified a number of barriers. some people do not have the kind of documentation they need. others are hard-pressed to come up with the fee, $465. this fee necessary to apply. others fear they are taking a and they will put themselves and themselves in ,eopardy, and there are others particularly from asian
countries who feel like they may bring shame on the countries. this is a group not typically used to talking about or being viewed or viewing themselves as being in the country in an undocumented status and that is really quite different from those in latin america countries, particularly mexico and central america where it is very common. other people have been holding out for a clearer pathway to legal status. they are waiting for a legalization program. others are geared by how they fit into the program. there are people that would otherwise fit the eligibility requirement but do not see themselves and the program. non-latinos often programperceiving the
as one for them. and the noncollege bound also because this program was originally tied up with the push for and the something that would help people going to college in the country but undocumented. so if there is further executive action for broader group of immigrants, and a host of nongovernmental organizations on will have to act quickly to organize, educate and assist but at least they will have the experience to draw on. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. now we're going to go get an even bigger picture, beyond the impact of the program into is the recipient or who is not to
talk about what people think about the program, what people think about immigration in general. to do that i am very pleased to welcome the director of hispanic researchat the pew center. just encase your wondering, it is not the charitable trust. it is a separate organization and we do not even work in the same building. they have their own offices. he is a well-known commentator in english and spanish on all things media, political >> good afternoon and thanks for that introduction, adam. i appreciate it. it's a real pleasure to be here today and i want to talk about some public data we have on the pew research certificate to the current immigration reform and ideas that are out there in addition to the views of the general public about immigrants
and how they see them in the united states. let me get started. first, i want to start by talking about deportation. doka is directed at providing relief from deportation for young people who came here as children and are unauthorized immigrants. you look atmosphere of deportation particularly among two games are represented, hispanics and asian americans. foreign born latinos are worried about deportation, whether it be for themselves or friends or family member or somebody that they know. and these are results we've seen that have been consistent over the past few years, particularly for latinos in terms of worrying about deportation. for asian americans on the other hand, it's a different story. most unauthorized immigrants are from latin america and the hispanic numbers are perhaps a surprise but i think it's important to note there are also unauthorized immigrants from other parts of the world.
and 11,000 imfwrants are from south asia. among immigrant asian americans we found few who say they worry a lot or some, somebody they know or they themselves may be deported. we've always been asking more recently about support for providing some sort of legal status on documented immigrants but also perhaps providing some sort of citizenship. this is data from the general u.s. public or databased off a survey of the general u.s. public asking americans in both february and july about legalizing or providing some way for unauthorized immigrants to become legal. and you can see here, for example, in february, 73% of american adults said that yes, they supported some sort of a legalization for unauthorized immigrants. in july, just a few weeks ago,
those numbers had slipped to 68%. so there has been a decline of five percentage points for support in the general public of some form of legalization. there's also been an increase in the share who say that unauthorized immigrants or people in the country illegally should not be allowed to stay legally. that number went up by six percentage points. there's been some change in the views of the american public about unauthorized immigrants, whether they should be given a path to legalization. now, it's interesting, where did the support change? well, a lot of the support has changed particularly among republicans. interestingly enough, back in february, tea party republicans and republicans in general, these are americans who identify or lean towards the republican party, generally speaking, they were supportive of some sort of legalization but as we've had a discussion about and a lot of news coverage of the unaccompanied minors at the border that led to change and opinions particularly among republicans.
you can see here 54% of republicans say undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the u.s. and down from 64% in february. among tea party republicans, the numbers have gone from 56% support in february to 41% today. so some of the biggest changes have been among republicans with tea party republicans having moved from a majority saying they support some sort of legalization to now only 41% saying that. to just show you how democrats feel about this, you can see their numbers, too, have slipped a little bit but not what you see for tea party republicans. now, how important is it to pass some sort of immigration reform this year? how important is it to do something significant in terms of legislation. you can see here there's been an increase in support among the american public that -- or view that something should be done. 49% in february of this year said that it was important to pass some sort of significant
legislation, but now july 2014, we find that number is up to 61% with 12% increase over february. you can see the numbers are up virtually everywhere but particularly among republicans, %. 15% and republicans, up 17 you see growth in the share of american adults who say it's important something be done. on the one hand, there's somewhat of a change in the view particularly among republicans and tea party republicans in support for some sort of legalization but there is strong support, growing support, in fact, for passing something significant soon in terms of immigrant legislation. now, we are obviously here to talk about daca and i wanted to show you some results we've had for daca but this is actually a little bit old now. this is from 2012 and we're planning to do some new work on this to see whether or not there has been some change in opinions about daca.
you see in 2012 when the program was announced, among the general u.s. public, 63% approved of the program and 33% disapproved of the program. among all hispanics, that number was 89% and you see across hispanics, native or foreign born or registered voters, very strong support for the president's deferred action program when it was announced back in 2012. now, unfortunately, i wish we had some new data on this. but we'll get to that sometime later on this year. nonetheless, we've also asked about whether or not latinos were aware of somebody who has or said that they will apply for daca. you can see that back in 2012 when the program was announced, about 31% of all hispanics said they knew somebody who was either planning to or has applied for the deferred action program. of course, foreign born latinos, more likely to say this than the native born. when you take a look at among the foreign born, those who are legal residents, a greater
share say that yes, they know somebody who was planning to or had applied, but among those who are not a u.s. citizen and not a legal resident, they're likely an unauthorized immigrant, you see more than half knew somebody who was planning to or had applied for the deferred action program. now, i want to close by showing you a little bit about something we've been tracking a number of years. the opinions americans have of immigrants has changed. now, we've been asking this question about whether or not immigrants are a strength to our country today because of their hard work and talents, or are they a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care? it's an old question and a question if we were to write it today might write something somewhat different but nonetheless, we've been asking it for almost two decades now. and you can see that the share of americas who say immigrants strengthen our country is now at 57 percent. back in 1994, it was only at
about 30%. and the share that says that immigrants are a burdenen our country, that share has dropped from about 2/3 in 1994 to only about 35% today. so the opinions that americans have of the nation's immigrants, and by the way, the u.s. has more immigrants than any other country, both legal and those who are unauthorized, the number stands at nearly 42 million and no other country comes close to that. it's also interesting to note that today's immigration wave is somewhat different than previous waves, latin americans and asians play a big role in shaping today's immigrant population compared with previous waves which were largely european, german or irish, or italian. so we've seen some big changes in terms of who is an immigrant and how big of a population that is standing today at about 42 million. so i'm going to close there because i have a cough.
so excuse me. but i'm going to close there and look forward to our discussion and conversation. thank you. [applause] >> so as we transition now to the q&a portion, i wanted to remind everyone, pew once again does not take any position either on current or proposed immigration law or policies. as we move to the discussion, if you do have a question, please already, you can get up and start to approach one of the microphones at either side of the room. when you do ask a question, i would ask that you please introduce yourself both by name and affiliation and i thank you in advance for keeping in mind our topic as well as to keep your comments succinct. while you're gathering your questions, i'm going to start by throwing one audrey's way. so it was really interesting, i
think, to note the application outcomes across different metropolitan areas, and as we've been looking at state and local activity, we've cited both new york, new york city, illinois, and chicago as all jurisdictions that have provided a lot of support generally for immigration measures in the past. so i wonder if you could unpack a little bit more of what you've seen and your interviews of what might explain some of the -- a bit of a differing outcome in those two major jurisdictions. >> sure. well, new york is an interesting case because it's a very geographically compact, dense, urban area with public transportation, lots of immigrant residents, lots of work opportunities for immigrants and it seems like the underlying composition of the
population there is slightly lder and there may be a number of people who have arrived in new york and gone directly to work and never been in school. and i think that the new york program that michelle mentioned, i believe, is designed in part to help encourage that population to get the educational credential that they need and to move those people into daca but also just to be able to have that training is very important. and i think both chicago and new york have very diverse immigrants, immigrant compositions. chicago is a little bit more concentrated with a higher share of mexicans and central ericans than new york, and
that may also offset things as well. >> great. i know many of the people in this room and i know you have questions so i would please encourage you to come to a -- yep. there's one coming. you can always count on delancey. [inaudible question] >> delancey guston with u.s. immigration services. this is a follow-up question for audrey. in the six cities you were highlighting, texas seems to be sent and as a native houstonian, i wonder what you can say about that. and especially from houston, it's interesting to see the approval rating is lower there than other places because it's a very much established immigrant destination. >> thank you. we are currently still in the
field and houston is on our list. and we'll probably go there next or maybe second next. and texas, you know, every place is different. and houston really stood out for the lower approval, current approval rate. and so there's really no way until we go there to figure out a little bit more about that. but i do think it's hard to take these approval rates, the lower ones, to heart because it may be a wave of applicants came in much later or the adjudication is taking longer. but we cannot differentiate those who are not approved into those that were denied and those who are still pending. so, you know, with such low denial rates, we kind of think it's going to work itself out, if every place is being treated more or less in the same way. i don't really have a great
answer but we'll talk again. >> sticking on the state and local theme, if i could throw one your way, you talked at length about significant investments the state of illinois has made over the past years and even beyond so from the illinois perspective, what's in it for the state? why make this investment for daca recipients for the unauthorized? >> well, in illinois we have a very vibrant immigrant community that actually spreads across the state, so from rockford, walk egan to beardstown, so contra to what the general impression is, there is immigrants all over illinois and we see it as an important part of our economy and community and to the extent we can invest in human capital is going to benefit the community at large and the state in general. it's something we feel is very important.
so like a lot of states, we were facing a very difficult fiscal situation but this is an area we feel is a wise investment. >> the microphone, if the people in the audience have questions, please do approach the microphones. mark, i was wondering if you could talk about, in light of all the immigration news of late, if you have data that also show why people want to come to the united states to kind of back out that issue a little bit for context. >> we've done some work looking particularly at latino immigrants and asking them why they've come to the u.s. and in many respects, economic opportunities is among the top, if not the top issue that they point to as a reason why they've come to the united states. but there are a number of reasons, education, family, those are also reasons why many people come. you also asked them about how they feel about life in the united states compared to the countries that they're from on a number of measures, everything from job opportunities to school
opportunities to even raising children. you'll find that generally speaking, hispanic immigrants will point to the united states as being perhaps better on some of these measures than their home countries with the one exception, connections to family. so when it comes to connections to family, the home country is oftentimes seen as the better place. but i would be very cautious in interpreting some of these results, partly because we're only interviewing immigrants who stayed. we haven't interviewed the immigrants who left. in fact, when you look at immigrants who arrived, say, within the last five years vs. those who have been here, say, for 20 years and ask them the following question, would you do it again if you could? you'll find that among immigrants who have been here 20 years or longer, virtually all of them say yeah, of course, but among those who have been here only for a short time, about 1/3 will say no, i would not do it again if i had the opportunity to do so. so i think that we're looking at and seeing, of course, immigrants who have quote, unquote found a place here.
and those who haven't, we didn't interview them so we don't know how they'd feel necessarily on some of these issues. >> i would ask michelle if you could weigh in a little bit more on the state and local roles. so looking at actually starting michelle and maybe others can chime in on this, given that the president has stated his intention to act, what would be really your short point of what the federal government needs to be aware of to ensure that states and localities are in a position to effectively implement what decisions may be taken at the federal level. >> that's a big question. i think that the federal government, as i mentioned in my talk, needs to be aware that states and localities play a role. that they need to be aware of these roles, that states and localities are already taking on with respect to daca, looking into the history and see what were the rules that states and localities took on
with respect to irca in the late 1980's and issuing driver's licenses to unauthorized immigrants, provides clues to what the potential roles and responsibilities of states and localities moving forward. i think the federal government needs to be aware of the impact that their discussions in terms of eligibility requirements and documentation, what is the impact on states and localities as well as the timing. i know that the federal government, of course, also needs to think about timing and how long they have to get ready to implement a new program. but there are many other people in state and local governments and in nongovernmental organizations that are also adhering to that time line. and of course, funding. i think that states and localities want to be involved in implementation but they can't necessarily do it for free and they may not have
their own resources to be able to kick in. so i think that there is something that federal government needs to think about is it there is going to be a role for states and localities, will there be any federal funding available to them? and also with, i just want to say again, this is something all states and many localities need to be thinking about. i think there's still an impression that this is an issue for new york and for chicago and los angeles, but as we're seeing with application rates for daca, many people are applying from these nontraditional immigrant receiving areas. and those areas need to be prepared in case there is some kind of expanded deferred action program in the future. >> let me just follow up on michelle's comments. this is a program that takes a lot of work, a lot of work on the ground. so maybe close to, i don't know, over 675,000 people have applied so far, and we have an
understanding of the federal role, they're responsible for setting the rules and for judging who gets into the program or who doesn't. but how a person who is potentially eligible for the program gets from thinking about it to actually doing it requires a lot of work, and in some cases, courage on their part, but the kinds of documentation and the type of information that is being tested almost through this process through trial and error is something that legislative -- collectively people are learning about but each individual is responsible for putting their own application together. so in terms of the state and local role, these nongovernmental actors are playing a huge, huge role. and in some ways many of the
service providers are actually shaping the program and shaping what it means to have a successful application. and they're learning from each other and there are some networks that exist usually in localities and regions but it could be important for places to share that information, especially when you think about more established places like illinois with strong infrastructure and strong advocacy even from the state to service providers are working on a much more either uncaring environment or in an actual hostile environment. so there's a lot of variation out there and it does require a lot of work. >> mark, did you want to say something? >> yes, i wanted to talk about, everybody, the renewal process and what we're expecting in terms of this, in terms of the
difficulties people might have f reapplying, etc. and want to talk about what you know. >> the renewal process has gotten underway and we don't know much about the numbers thoughant dotally it seems like it will take -- though anecdotally it will take a bit to ramp up but people need to know in advance of their two-year anniversary, there is a window of time and they have to be aware in order not to be caught in a moment when uscis is superbusy and can't get to their application. so fortunately, the documentation required for renewal is not as onerous as the initial application. t's very straightforward and people have to demonstrate a
few things but the thing that seems to be the hardest for , particularly those that don't make a lot of money or families with more than one applicant that needs to renew is the application fee, it's $465. for each person. and this is a large sum of money when you come from a low-income family. so there's a number of considerations out there, and i think people also have to weigh whether they think it's worth it to renew. and that's another thing that's on the table. >> yeah, i think it will be interesting for us to revisit this issue after renewal and given their experience with the initial daca application process if states and localities take on a new or different or expanded role with respect to renewal. we'll have to revisit that. >> great.
we have a question on this side. >> hi, i have a question for audrey. >> please identify yourself. >> yes, my name is anna gonzalez, i'm from pew research center. and i have a question for audrey. i was wondering if you explored the effect that some of these decisions, but particularly lawyers who are working pro bono to apply to prepare the applications for daca applicants have in this, one, the effect they would have in what you found of the ages and all those relations. i know from experience that some of them have gone first, sent first applications that they know that they have all the documentation and they will be approved and then continue to follow up. so how much do you think this will have an effect on what you found about the ages of the applicants and also the geography, the rights of
approval you have found, first of all. >> right. so the question is really how much are these actors who are providing services shaping the outcomes that we're finding? and it's really hard to know, to be up front about that. but one of the things that's very hard to know, and my colleagues who are working on the project with me who are actually here, jill wilson and nicole swarlinka. i'm not calling on them because they're talking over there, they're worried about that -- no. one of the things that's very hard for us to know is what of all applicants are actually using somebody to assist them in the application process, right? so we've talked to dozens and dozens of people in six places across the country. and we have a bit of a gauge on first and foremost how many people are being served by
those organizations, and it seems like it's possible that most people aren't using a service provider. and we have no way of really knowing that. with the way that we're conducting our research and also with the way that the data is collected by uscis. because a lot of people may be using a provider but that may not be recorded on the applications. that's a first order question. then the second question which gets to yours, anna, is how likely is it that people are moving forward, etc., easier and how does it affect the pattern of outcomes that we see? it's pretty likely those came in first and went out first. and it's pretty likely that hose case are still coming in. but i think in the beginning they were the daca ready situation i referred to but i think the adjudication process
on the other end probably works in a similar rhythm. so that's the best answer i can give you at this point. >> thanks. >> madly sbotny from madeleine scott college. i'm interested in hearing from all of you what do we know about the localities about the effects of daca on recipients going back to school or entering the labor market or changes in their labor market outcomes, what do we know so far? >> i'll say something. so anecdotal evidence, just the young people that i know, because i don't have hard evidence to point to but it really, really has made a difference for a number of young people being able to pursue their careers after finishing college. some young people decided to return to school having not gotten their complete school diploma but trying to get that
done. that's a simple of three or four people i know so that's really small but seems to have made a big impact on their lives. >> and just to add to that, while we don't have hard evidence, that's exactly right. i think in our communities, we hear about it all the time where young people are actually pursuing careers in areas of their interests, whereas before, they were scrambling and didn't have any opportunities and certainly had a big impact not just on them but their families and the entire community, really. > i have some also anecdotal evidence, mostly because i'm talking to service providers so it's a little bit broader. but one thing to consider is one of the best benefits of daca for any young person is the work authorization card so this gives people the right to work legally in this country and also improves their chances in getting a better job or job in the formal sector or any
number of good characteristics for better jobs. and i think in terms of educational outcomes, there are programs in many places across the country that are reaching out, not only to the daca population but to undocumented students and offering in-state tuition and other ways of serving this population better. so people who are taking advantage of that are improving their chances. how large a scope, we can't tell right at this moment, but we are looking into programs that actually are trying to nk the daca applicant, the daca recipients with jobs programs and better outcomes. so we'll at least know a little bit more about that. >> let me add one other perspective and that's from the -- >> good morning. i apologize for the weather but
we'll try and make it up to you here. i'm going to let deputy national security advisor ben rhoades lead us off. he's got about 10 or 15 minutes and can handle the nitty-gritty on the foreign policy pieces and then i'll flush everything else out. ben? >> ok. thanks, everybody. let me just begin by giving an update on the president's morning. he was briefed again by national security advisor suzanne rice. he did a phone call with the prime minister netanyahu of israel. we'll have a fuller readout of that call as it just recently completed. they obviously were focused on the ongoing efforts and to get a sustainable cease-fire in place with respect to gaza. with that, happy to take questions. julie? >> can you update us on the president's thinking in terms of using u.s. troops to do some kind of rescue mission? and even though that wouldn't be combat troops on the ground in a traditional sense, wouldn't that put americans at risk in a similar way? >> well, again, first of all,
we have a very specific objective with respect to then humanitarian situation, that is to get food, water and emergency supplies to the population on this mountain, and also, as necessary, to take air strikes against issel as they threaten the people on that mountain and to date, i believe we've taken in the range of seven air strikes associated with that mission. at the same time, there needs to be a lasting solution that gets that population to a safe space where they can receive more permanent assistance. so what the president has done is authorized the the president has authorized the deployment of roughly 100 30 u.s. military personnel, who will assess the situation in northern iraq. they then will make recommendations about how to follow through on an effort to get people off that mountain and to a safe place. you heard prime minister cameron indicate today they are cooperating with us in those efforts as well. these 130 personnel are